|
="metsguyinmichigan":f6iduah0]At $20 million or $25 million, Manny would by far be our highest-paid player, no?
Do you think it upsets the apple cart when you have guys who are not freaks and who work hard and can play defense getting $7 million less?
Manny sure can rake, but do you want that baggage?[/quote:f6iduah0]
People making $13 - $18 million a year should stfu, no?
|
TransMonk
Dec 24 2008 08:45 AM
|
|
Well, Manny's not chopped liver.
I think the longer the Mets wait with no action, the cheaper he could be had for as well.
|
Nymr83
Dec 24 2008 10:25 AM
|
|
| ]People making $13 - $18 million a year should stfu, no? |
people making one million a year should stfu, imo.
i'd play sports professionally for a third of the league minimum and be damn happy doing it.
if you don't think manny should be making more money than you, fire your agent and hire his.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 24 2008 10:28 AM
|
|
Why are we so willing to attack non-specific players for what they haven't actually done or said, and willing to go to unprecedented measures to obtain Ramirez despite what he has done and said?
Some rubbery ethics, I think.
|
Centerfield
Dec 24 2008 11:46 AM
|
|
If they complain, they should stfu.
If Manny complains later, he should stfu.
I want him on the Mets because he is very good. He is not as good an option as the one that signed with the MFY's, but he is by far the best option available.
GET IT DONE.
|
Willets Point
Dec 24 2008 11:52 AM
|
|
I saw Manny kissing Santa Claus.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 24 2008 01:29 PM
|
|
="Centerfield":vgdkqzhe]If they complain, they should stfu.
If Manny complains later, he should stfu.[/quote:vgdkqzhe]
He's complained his whole career and he's never stfu. We have no business complaining while at the same time demanding the Mets reward him at an unprecedented level anyway.
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 24 2008 02:03 PM
|
|
Just a little curious here as to why Delgado is a 'must dump' because we're afraid he'll crash and burn while, at the same age, Manny is a 'must get'?
Is Manny a better hitter? -- Yes, although the 3 years of CD leading up to his NYM days were reasonably close to what Manny put up over the last 3 (and Carlos stays on the field more). And we can't be citing the intangibles of fielding, running, clubhouse, etc. cuz no one's worse there than Man-Ram.
So while we may be projecting (hoping for?) a shallower decline for Manny as he hits 37, 38, 39 than what we got for Carlos at 34, 35, 36 - but does that merit a deal at twice the rate and 3 times the length than the one-year deal we're "stuck" with for CarlosII ?!?
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 26 2008 07:11 AM
|
|
Newsday:
As for the idea that the Mets might go after Manny Ramirez now that it's highly unlikely the Yankees will sign him, that thought was shot down.
A Mets source said flatly: "We're not signing Manny."
|
Centerfield
Dec 29 2008 12:53 PM
|
|
I haven't seen anyone describe Delgado as a "must-dump". My complaint is that it is risky to rely on him to be a middle of the lineup run producer. Manny is not just a better hitter, he's a much better hitter. And has been incredibly consistent over the past several years, unlike Delgado. (I'm not sure what relevance Delgado's three years before joining the Mets has to this discussion. His three years since joining the Mets have been inconsisitent. If I'm reading the post wrong, ignore this part.)
The reason I advocated dumping Delgado was because of this idea that we were "set" at first base. I wanted to pursue Texiera because he was the best option available. If we got him, we wouldn't need Delgado and would have to trade him for something valuable or, at the very least, clear his salary.
Now, since that option is gone, the next best option is to get Manny. It's a bigger risk than Texiera because of his age and intangibles, but it's a shorter commitment, and fits the Mets' needs position-wise a bit better. The more money, poor fielding, questionable attitude make him a less attractive option than Tex, but since he's the best thing available, and there doesn't be much of a bidding war to get him, I want him on my team.
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 29 2008 01:16 PM
|
|
| ="Centerfield"]I'm not sure what relevance Delgado's three years before joining the Mets has to this discussion. His three years since joining the Mets have been inconsisitent. |
Only in that we'd risk falliing into the same trap of paying someone for their past performance while getting an aging/declining version - at which point we'd blame Omar for assembling a great 2006 All-Star lineup only doing so for the 2010 season and, Jeez how did he not he see that one coming?!?
Delgado, in his three years leading up to the Met trade, was nearly as dominant offensively as Manny has been over his last three and now we question whether he's worth holding onto for half what we're proposing to throw at ManRam. Yeah Manny's better, but he's also more volatile, misses more games, and is older to the point where he'd be more likely to decline faster than the decline we've seen from Carlos. And, like Carlos only maybe moreso, it's not like there's a reservoir of other skills to make him worthwhile once the bat starts to slide towards less-killer status.
| ]The reason I advocated dumping Delgado was because of this idea that we were "set" at first base. I wanted to pursue Texiera because he was the best option available. If we got him, we wouldn't need Delgado and would have to trade him for something valuable or, at the very least, clear his salary. |
I don't object to the idea of dealing Delgado (particularly for Teixeira). I've said before that it's worth a look if for no other reason that because he represents the best balance between those I'd consider at least close to untouchable (our SS, 3B & CF) and those we have with lesser or no value (our catchers, 2Bmen, and corner OFs)
| ]Now, since [the Teixeira] option is gone, the next best option is to get Manny. It's a bigger risk than Texiera because of his age and intangibles, but it's a shorter commitment, and fits the Mets' needs position-wise a bit better. The more money, poor fielding, questionable attitude make him a less attractive option than Tex, but since he's the best thing available, and there doesn't be much of a bidding war to get him, I want him on my team. |
What I'm questioning is what I consider the overly enthusiastic offers being made here with talk of the likes of 3 years and $25/per.
I'd balk at 2x$20 and would prefer to keep it to one year.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 29 2008 01:25 PM
|
|
If Manny's attitude is regarded as "questionable," I'm wondering what the question is.
Play down the importance of attitude as a factor, sure, but don't play down the negative degree of his.
|
DocTee
Dec 29 2008 02:58 PM
|
|
Double yuk.
|
A Boy Named Seo
Dec 29 2008 02:58 PM
|
|
Blecch.
I read something yesterday in the LATimes, I think, about how badly he's sucking in winter ball.
He's still too heavy, too.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Dec 29 2008 02:58 PM
|
|
Andruw Jones?
Coming off a miserable season and due to get $15 million next year?
Only if the Dodgers pay about 80% of his salary AND take on Luis Castillo.
Then maybe you have the makings of a deal.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 29 2008 03:01 PM
|
|
Sometimes, you've got to take bad contracts if you want to move bad contracts.
Jones is not the worst idea, if the Dodgers remove the Castillo contract (if only to move it on to another team) or eat 85% of Jones' contract. Thing is that we have a plan in place already for left, so Jones doesn't have to be any more than an experiment.
Personally, I've never had a problem with the way he spells his name. He's from a Dutch island, for Pete's sake.
We'd still need an answer at second, I'm afraid.
|
attgig
Dec 29 2008 03:09 PM
Edited 2 time(s), most recently on Dec 29 2008 03:16 PM
|
|
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/sports_ ... -summ.html
Playing for Aguilas Cibaenas, Jones is hitting .188 through five games with three singles and eight strikeouts in 16 at-bats. Jones has twice struck out three times in a game and has yet to collect more hits than strikeouts in the same game.
later in that article:
But the MVP of the regular season was Aguilas' outfielder/DH Victor Diaz, a major league free agent, who shattered the Dominican record with 17 home runs and became the first native player in league
and:
Former Angel Francisco Rodriguez, who set the single-season save record last summer with 62, got another save in his first appearance of the winter for Lara, but it was a rocky one with Rodriguez giving up three runs, a walk and a run before getting the final out. Rodriguez signed a three-year, $37-million free-agent contract with the New York Mets earlier this month.
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 29 2008 03:10 PM
|
|
Castillo is more useful to us at this point than is Andruw.
|
attgig
Dec 29 2008 03:12 PM
Edited 1 time(s), most recently on Dec 29 2008 03:15 PM
|
|
="Frayed Knot":3mfozl2l]Castillo is more useful to us at this point than is Andruw.[/quote:3mfozl2l]
but in 2010 and 2011, Andruw could be more useful to us...
|
Centerfield
Dec 29 2008 03:14 PM
|
|
I feel like Omar sometimes leaks names like Andruw Jones so we will feel better about him doing nothing.
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 29 2008 03:19 PM
Edited 3 time(s), most recently on Dec 29 2008 03:23 PM
|
|
| ]but in 2010 and 2011, Andruw could be more useful to us... |
Except that with the money being more or less equal - and it sort of is: $15 for AJ vs $18 for LC - it doesn't really matter if they spend it all in one year or spread it out over three. Actually, it's probably better spread out so there's not the same pressure to play the guy just based on the contract. Jerry sat the ailing Castillo down the stretch last year. Could he do the same with a player paid 2.5x as much that his GM just traded for?
Plus, if Castillo bounces to to even close to what he was for like 8 of the last 9 seasons, then his pay for the final two years is more in line with his output and/or can be dealt without having to eat the entire thing. He was still useful as recently as the back-half of 2007.
With Jones, unless he performs some sort of miraculous turnaround, it looks like every penny spent on him is useless.
|
Centerfield
Dec 29 2008 03:22 PM
|
|
I just looked it up. Castillo beat Jones in OPS last season by 155 points.
|
Vince Coleman Firecracker
Dec 29 2008 05:13 PM
|
|
="Edgy DC":cozfgz5b]Sometimes, you've got to take bad contracts if you want to move bad contracts.[/quote:cozfgz5b]
Can Omar take Andrew Jones' contract in exchange for the Dodgers picking up the remainder of Bobby Bonilla's?
They're about as useful on the field, but Bobby Bo makes less per season.
|
Rockin' Doc
Dec 29 2008 05:16 PM
|
|
I would love to see the Mets unload Castillo and his horrendous contract, but I wouldn't trade him for Andruw Jones even up.
The ESPN report I saw online stated that the Dodgers had no interest in Castillo because they were committed to Blake DeWitt at second base. The Mets are reportedly interested in playing Jones in right field in place of Ryan Church. This makes me worried about how well Church's recovery from his concussions is (or isn't going).
I just can't understand the Mets interest in possibly trading for Jones at this point. In the past 2 seasons, he has more strike outs than base hits. Last season, he had more strike outs than hits and walks combined. As bad as Castillo has been since coming to New York, his OPS+ in both 2007 and 2008 was substantially better than the that of Jones.
|
Edgy DC
Dec 29 2008 06:28 PM
|
|
I'm certain their interest would be a low-rent reclamation project. I wasn't advocating, just trying to add some context.
I never liked the guy and think he should return half of his gold gloves.
|
Rockin' Doc
Dec 29 2008 07:57 PM
|
|
<b>Mets' interest in Jones dwindles</b>
<a href="http://newyork.mets.mlb.com/news/article.jsp?ymd=20081229&content_id=3729835&vkey=news_nym&fext=.jsp&c_id=nym">Source says trade with Dodgers is not going to happen</a>
By Marty Noble / MLB.com
NEW YORK -- Whatever interest the Mets might have had in diminished center fielder Andruw Jones had a rather short shelf life. The Mets and Dodgers were involved in superficial discussions involving Jones during the Winter Meetings earlier this month. But a person familiar with those discussions said Monday "nothing is ongoing, and nothing [no trade] is going to happen."
ESPN had reported on its Web site that the Mets had expressed an interest in the former Gold Glove center fielder, but the report didn't mention a time element. The time clearly has passed.
The Mets had approached the Dodgers hoping to trade their damaged goods -- Luis Castillo -- for the Dodgers' -- Jones. It wasn't clear how the Mets would have used Jones, but it is highly doubtful that he would have displaced Carlos Beltran for more than a day of rest in center. The ESPN report suggested Jones would have played right but provided no indication of what the Mets would do with incumbent right fielder Ryan Church.
Which club would have assumed responsibility for which player's salary also was unclear, though there was some sense that the Dodgers would have been required to pay most of the remaining $22.1 million on Jones' $36.2 million, four-year contract. The Mets owe Castillo $18 million for three more seasons.
Marty Noble is a reporter for MLB.com. This story was not subject to the approval of Major League Baseball or its clubs.
|
smg58
Dec 29 2008 08:01 PM
|
|
The latest report says that the subject of a Jones deal came up at the Winter Meetings but hasn't come up since.
Before the Dodgers signed Blake and the Mets dealt Schoeneweis, there might have been a fit. Jones' stock has plummeted so far down that him for Castillo straight up wouldn't have been worth it, but if they also took Schoeneweis and gave us Hong Chih Kuo, we'd be paying $5M up front (counting Jones' $15M salary, but not the additional $6M in signing bonuses the Dodgers still owe him) to get a significant bullpen upgrade and free ourselves from Castillo. I'd have been willing to do that, even if Jones' knee continues to render him useless.
As it stands, IF his play in winter ball suggests that his knee is OK, Jones could be a righthanded Endy with some pop, worth maybe two or three million. His defensive metrics remained well above average until this past year.
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 29 2008 08:15 PM
|
|
IOW, what Noble is delicately saying is that the batch of Kool-aid someone seems to be feeding Olney is long past its expiration date.
| ]$22.1 million [left] on Jones' $36.2 million, four-year contract. |
Holy bronze gloves Batman, that's even more than I thought!!!
|
A Boy Named Seo
Dec 30 2008 08:43 AM
|
|
="Frayed Knot"]IOW, what Noble is delicately saying is that the batch of Kool-aid someone seems to be feeding Olney is long past its expiration date.
| ]$22.1 million [left] on Jones' $36.2 million, four-year contract. |
Holy bronze gloves Batman, that's even more than I thought!!! |
The money's right, but the years Noble reports aren't... Jones is entering the second year of a 2-year deal.
[url=http://mlbcontracts.blogspot.com/2005/01/los-angeles-dodgers.html]Cot's[/url].
Glad the point's moot, though.
|
Frayed Knot
Dec 30 2008 09:32 AM
|
|
Dodgers reportedly batting their eyelashes in the direction of Adam Dunn, a move that, if made, would almost shirley erase Manny from their radar screens.
Sumthin tells me that the Boras/Manny camp 'make-em-sweat' strategy of not returning those Dodger phone calls when the 2yrs/$45 deal was on the table is going to come back and bite them.
Y'know Scott, sometimes feigning indifference by assuming that the better prom date is right around the corner will leave you home alone with a 4-pack of Bartles & James and the year 1 'Dawson's Creek' DVD.
|
John Cougar Lunchbucket
Dec 30 2008 09:34 AM
|
|
There's always the MFYs
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 03 2009 06:37 AM
|
|
Giants reportedly willing to offer four years (3 + option) to Manny - (Heyman)
Same source also says that the Dodgers are going to restructure Andruw's remaining year so as to turn much of it into deferred money, a move most likely designed to make trading him easier.
Heyman, btw, is going to be attached to the new MLB network, tacking that gig on to his existing ones of being the scoop guy for SI.com and WFAN.
Bet he views having 3 jobs at a time when his former employer Newsday is laying off hundreds strikes him as a good situation these days.
|
Edgy DC
Jan 03 2009 10:20 AM
|
|
Why do clowns like him and Kornheiser keep getting hired?
|
MFS62
Jan 03 2009 11:38 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC":ig70jsak]Why do clowns like him and Kornheiser keep getting hired?[/quote:ig70jsak]
We're hoping that was a rhetorical question.
There's no reasonable answer.
Later
|
Edgy DC
Jan 03 2009 12:03 PM
|
|
See, I think there is. I think somebody up there thinks contemptuous louts make for better television --- particularly sports programming. The thinking is that sports fans like to feel superior, so sports guys with an air of superority show them the way.
I don't know truly what the chicken or the egg is, though. Do snottier sportscasters and sportswriters lead to snottier fans, or vice versa?
Side question: You get to knock one of these guys in his smug puss. Which do you choose, in order?
<img src="http://www.insidesocal.com/tomhoffarth/112_0804_04z%2Bjohn_salley%2Bbest_damn_sports_show_period.jpg">
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 03 2009 01:05 PM
|
|
="Edgy DC":1g5o7698]Why do clowns like him and Kornheiser keep getting hired?[/quote:1g5o7698]
In Heyman's case it's largely due to the fact that ESPN has not only hired a bevy of baseball journos (Gammons, Kurkjian, Stark, Olney) to staff their shows, but also holds them to an exclusivity arrangement where they're not permitted to chat on other outlets.
So a joint like WFAN, looking to have a go-to guy for non-NYC-centric info, hires L.I. native Heyman shortly after he becomes SI.com's man on the national beat. Likewise the new MLBN, now a competitor of sorts to ESPN's BB2N and their stable of nationally known untouchables, is tapping both him and fellow SI-er (as well as Newsday alum) Tom Verducci as their news diggers.
And if it's just Heyman you have a problem with -- well, he often is in on the ground floor of a number of stories which is essentially what these outlets want in this insta-info era.
|
MFS62
Jan 03 2009 01:18 PM
|
|
="Edgy DC":aq2vii7c]Side question: You get to knock one of these guys in his smug puss. Which do you choose, in order?
[/quote:aq2vii7c]
I'd start at the left. Take out the big guy and the others will probably run anyhow.
Why else?
Because of the uni he's wearing.
Later
|
Edgy DC
Jan 03 2009 01:19 PM
|
|
No, I clearly have a problem with clowns.
|
metsguyinmichigan
Jan 03 2009 01:37 PM
|
|
Dibble.
Then I'd just keep hitting him while the other three run away.
Yes, he deserves it that much.
|
Fman99
Jan 03 2009 01:50 PM
|
|
You start with the littlest white guy. Duh.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 03 2009 03:18 PM
|
|
Even if you don't like him, a reporter like Heyman can't possibly be lumped in with the 'ain't we naughty' jock-sniffers and frat boys from a piece of gossipy trash like 'Best Damn Sports Show'.
|
metirish
Jan 03 2009 03:24 PM
|
|
Does Heyman still keep his SNY gig? I see he is listed on sny.tv as SNY's Sports News Team.
|
Frayed Knot
Jan 04 2009 07:37 AM
|
|
Yes, Heyman will be SNY's journo-for-hire as well.
Also, Newsday media writer Neil Best suggests in today's column that, "Barack Obama will name Jon Heyman the official Sports Journalist of America, allowing cash-strapped media companies to avoid employing anyone else"
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 27 2009 07:41 AM
|
|
Manny rejects latest Dodger offer.
Essentially it was the same 2/$45 deal he scoffed at before except this one put the 2nd year option in the player's hands rather than the club's. This way, iffin' he had a good year, he was free to fly the coop and search for a new deal maybe in a better economy ... but NOOOOOoooooo!
If I'm the Dodgers now I counter with a lower offer.
|
Gwreck
Feb 27 2009 08:01 AM
|
|
I'm rooting for the Dodgers here. From all accounts, they've offered fantastic offers, none of which Ramirez has accepted. I think their next public statement is to suggest that while they clearly want him on their team, he doesn't want to be there -- that they'll keep their offer open but need to prepare for the upcoming season and can't be bothered with a distraction like this.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Feb 27 2009 08:06 AM
|
|
I guess the Dodgers figured they could get Manny for "only" $25 million now that spring training has started and Manny is still out of work.
I guess they were wrong.
What team does Boras figure will give him a better offer than that?
|
Centerfield
Feb 27 2009 08:09 AM
|
|
It's a weird situation. Manny obviously needs the Dodgers, but Boras must know that the Dodgers need him too. Dunn, Abreu, Ibanez and Burrell are already with other teams.
Nice time for Omar to swoop in and steal him.
|
Frayed Knot
Feb 27 2009 09:56 AM
|
|
="Centerfield":33hc15pz]Nice time for Omar to swoop in and steal him.[/quote:33hc15pz]
But for what?
If the key to snagging Manny is to offer him a 3rd year guaranteed I don't want to do that (and I'm positive the Mets don't either).
|
metirish
Feb 27 2009 10:01 AM
|
|
| ="Gwreck"]I'm rooting for the Dodgers here. From all accounts, they've offered fantastic offers, none of which Ramirez has accepted. I think their next public statement is to suggest that while they clearly want him on their team, he doesn't want to be there -- that they'll keep their offer open but need to prepare for the upcoming season and can't be bothered with a distraction like this. |
| ]
"We love Manny Ramirez," Dodgers owner Frank McCourt said, "and we want Manny back, but we feel we are negotiating against ourselves. When his agent finds those 'serious offers' from other clubs, we'll be happy to re-start the negotiations."
|
|
Fman99
Feb 27 2009 10:01 AM
|
|
I wonder if Ollie would've been doing the same thing had the Mets not upped from 3/30 to 3/36.
|
DocTee
Feb 27 2009 10:05 AM
|
|
My guess: the Giants swoop in and deflate their division rivals and wrap up the West before the season begins. They have had a very nice offseason already and this would be the perfect way to wrap it up.
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Feb 27 2009 10:17 AM
|
|
Perhaps he could make this a year of service: like Kane in "Kung Fu" (or Jules at the end of "Pulp Fiction," or Ricky Williams post-marijuana suspension), he could wander the earth, stopping wherever the wind blew him, or a scary right-handed bat could help make the world a better, clutchier place.
Or, since Boras is involved, maybe a "Have Dreads, Will Travel" scenario? (If only this were the NBA, land of 10-day contracts.)
'Cause, you know, I don't think there's an f-ing way the Dodgers are ponying up significantly more than 25 mil a year.
|
Nymr83
Feb 27 2009 12:17 PM
|
|
hold firm, Dodgers. It is almost March 1st, I doubt there are many/any other teams out there who still have $25 mil left in ther budget for this year, much less the desire to commit multiple years in this economy to a player known to whine his way out of town when he gets unhappy.
He'll end up a Dodger, and likely at the price they've offered, give or take a small amount so BorASS can save face.
|
Centerfield
Feb 27 2009 12:47 PM
|
|
="Frayed Knot":32cq35mr]="Centerfield":32cq35mr]Nice time for Omar to swoop in and steal him.[/quote:32cq35mr]
But for what?
If the key to snagging Manny is to offer him a 3rd year guaranteed I don't want to do that (and I'm positive the Mets don't either).[/quote:32cq35mr]
Match the offer. It would offer them a way to save face by taking the same terms and claiming "We wanted to be in New York all along."
|
Nymr83
Feb 27 2009 03:20 PM
|
|
I would worry that matching the offer lets Boras/Ramirez use he Mets offer as leverage against LA with no actual intention of coming here. I wouldn't make the offer unless I thought it was going to be accepted, and even then I'd say to Boras (perhaps not publicly) that its a take it or leave it offer, we are under no circumstances going higher or dragging this out
|
Vic Sage
Mar 02 2009 08:58 AM
|
|
there is no offer to match. LA pulled their latest "off the table" and are now insisting on dealing from scratch.
I'm loving this.
|
Rockin' Doc
Mar 02 2009 09:05 AM
|
|
This is turning into an interesting game of chicken. Both sides need the other, but neither wants to give in. I don't blame the Dodgers for not wishing to bid against themselves.
I hope the Dodgers hold firm against Manny and Boras. Let Manny see how he likes watching from the sidelines with Bonds. If there is no contract, then there is no windfall pay day for Boras, so I still expect the two sides will eventually come to an agreement.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 02 2009 09:09 AM
|
|
I'd love it if Manny ended up as a Long Island Duck this year. Not that I give a rat's ass about the Ducks, but because of the big dose of humility that would come with it.
I don't expect that to happen, of course, but I also have no idea what will happen. Probably some other team (other than the Dodgers or Mets, that is) will end up signing Manny to a one-year deal, perhaps for less than $20 million.
|
Frayed Knot
Mar 02 2009 09:12 AM
|
|
Reading some crawl this morning (forget where) Boras is claiming that the Dodgers have not responded to team-Manny's last three proposals.
Not sure if those were actual proposals or just something that exists in Scott's head.
|
Nymr83
Mar 02 2009 01:31 PM
|
|
My guess would be it was Borass repeating his original offer from November 3 more times.
I am really rooting for Manny to be playing outside MLB right now. I wonder if anyone in Japan wants him?
|
LeiterWagnerFasterStrongr
Mar 02 2009 01:52 PM
|
|
RE: Manny in Japan
"Mann-u being Mann-u?" would make a FANTASTIC midwinter-doldrums video rental.
|
Edgy DC
Mar 04 2009 05:58 AM
|
|
Reports have an agreement in principle of two years, $45 million with the Dodgers.
|
Benjamin Grimm
Mar 04 2009 07:32 AM
|
|
Which is basically the offer that Manny rejected <i>and</i> that the Dodgers pulled off the table!
|
metirish
Mar 04 2009 08:13 AM
|
|
New reports have different money angle
Scott Boras Able To Get Manny Ramirez $20 Billion In Economic Stimulus Money
| ]
WASHINGTON—After a series of closed-door talks, Scott Boras, the agent known for representing the highest-paid players in baseball, set another record for the game's largest contract when he finalized Manny Ramirez's $20 billion agreement with the United States federal government on Thursday. "Manny's .396 batting average last season with the Dodgers, as well as his playoff performance, proved that he is as important to this country as infrastructure projects, health care, and renewable energy development," Boras said during an interview, adding that Ramirez is especially satisfied with the indefinite length of the contract. "He's promised to cut 47 hours of antics this year and to make necessary attitude adjustments in order to remain solvent. Any criticism Manny receives for this contract is simply what comes with getting a huge amount of money from the government during a time of crisis." A clause in the contract states Ramirez could receive an additional $6 billion if he successfully saves the American auto industry.
|
The Onion
|
Frayed Knot
Mar 04 2009 08:28 AM
|
|
| ="Benjamin Grimm"]Which is basically the offer that Manny rejected <i>and</i> that the Dodgers pulled off the table! |
All the back-and-forth has apparently been over different versions of the same 2@$45 deal.
- One had the 2nd year at a club option
- another put the option in Manny's court but deferred some of the cash
- and the Manny/Boras camp has supposedly been making couter-offers although no one seems to know what they are.
Then, of course, there are all those offers from the mystery teams to consider.
|
seawolf17
Mar 04 2009 08:54 AM
|
|
| ="Frayed Knot"]Then, of course, there are all those offers from the mystery teams to consider. |
"I'm just saying we were in the mix."
|
Edgy DC
Mar 04 2009 08:57 AM
|
|
Buddy looks a little more like an aging mob accountant every year.
|
metirish
Mar 04 2009 09:04 AM
|
|
="Edgy DC":wpmn8dqi]Buddy looks a little more like an aging mob accountant every year.[/quote:wpmn8dqi]
True , he's got a bit of "Paulie Walnuts" in him.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
